It's only making used items more tempting to buy because of the biggest gap between the prices. It's seriously ridiculous.. all the prices just went like 15% up.. 2900 without rebate for 70-200II .. WTH?

Canon needs to monitor these kind of activities. Otherwise, Canon will loose many more loyal customers.

As far as I see it Canon does everything and more to protect mid- to high-range investments like the 5d3, that's why they spec'ed the 6d as it is. If an investment is safe as far as electronics goes, it's with Canon ff and L.

That being said the 5d3 is a special case because most people though that $3500 was mildly to ridiculously overpriced given the competition and the improvements over the 5d2, and I'm sure the price will continue to drop until it's at least on d800 level.

I can see the logic behind Canon writing minimum pricing agreements into their supply contracts. If these did not exist, there would be a ‘race to the bottom’ which would negatively impact upon Canon’s product perception, but more seriously, would destroy Canon’s dealer network. Effectively, supply of Canon products would end up being concentrated in the hands of a few large retailers (like Amazon), who could offer the lowest prices by best exploiting their economies of scale. These few retailers would then be in a position to dictate terms to Canon. It is therefore hardly surprising that Canon is taking action to maintain the status quo.

I think that people are annoyed with this move because Canon have created the perception that their products are getting more expensive than Nikon’s, whilst at the same time offering little to no added benefits for their users. This is particularly true with the 5D MkIII, where Canon is seeking to price it against the D800e, when the market price was started to fall to closer to the D800. The strategy will only work (i.e. generate more revenue for Canon) if the demand for the 5D MkIII is sufficiently inelastic, that is the number of people who do not purchase a 5D MkIII at the higher price is more than offset by the additional revenue from those who do. I’m sure that Canon will be monitoring this closely and will react accordingly.

Canon is NOT making any more money from this move as they aren't changing their wholesale prices. This is a move to protect small businesses and brick and mortar stores. The internet stores can afford to cut margins on Canon gear much more than your local retailer because of their lower overhead and massive sales numbers.

Look at it this way...how many stores in your city actually carry (in stock) a 5diii or 1dx? The local stores will only order one for you because the inventory costs on the big ticket items is hard to justify if the margins are cut down by internet pricing. One advantage (only one for the consumer) of this move by Canon is that you might see more local retailers carrying high end gear.

Unfortunately for the B&M stores, there will still be an advantage to ordering online to avoid state sales tax (in most states).

For those crying supply/demand or free market this isn't any different than the government setting price floors on milk. The Government recognized that a free market would result in the obliteration of small farms in the US. Canon has realized (rightfully so) that internet sales were endangering every brick and mortar store sales.

For those who want to blame someone about this look away from Canon to the big box electronics stores. I suspect that it wasn't the small business mom and pop camera store that made this happen. It was most likely the larger retailers (best buy, wolf etc) that were putting the pressure on Canon to change the policies.

rubidium

Apple uses the same tactic. Look around. No matter where you buy - the Apple Store, Best Buy, Amazon...name the outlet...for any given Apple product, the price differences among any outlets you care to check will never be more than about $10 different in either direction.

Apple does it differently though - They dont give you any margin to move on.

When my work sold Apple, a $1599 laptop cost us about $1560 to buy in.

Apple uses the same tactic. Look around. No matter where you buy - the Apple Store, Best Buy, Amazon...name the outlet...for any given Apple product, the price differences among any outlets you care to check will never be more than about $10 different in either direction.

Apple does it differently though - They dont give you any margin to move on.

When my work sold Apple, a $1599 laptop cost us about $1560 to buy in.

Canon uses 1/2 the successful Apple formula. Apple 1.) has a clearly superior product, and 2.) charges more than all its competitors. Canon has "step 2" down pat. How long can that work without "step 1", though?

An overnight 20% price increase is hard to stomach or defend, even by the ones who have drunk the most of Canon's Kool-Ade. Dx0 Mark overall scores may not be perfect, but with the Nikons consistently scoring much higher in Dx0 AND basically every photo magazine out there, while also selling for 15% to 25% less (D3 and D4 price vs. 1D-X) (or D800 price vs. 5D3), all but the True Believers will see this as relevant information pointing towards Nikon as the better purchase.

gkreis

Canon is NOT making any more money from this move as they aren't changing their wholesale prices. This is a move to protect small businesses and brick and mortar stores. The internet stores can afford to cut margins on Canon gear much more than your local retailer because of their lower overhead and massive sales numbers.

Look at it this way...how many stores in your city actually carry (in stock) a 5diii or 1dx? The local stores will only order one for you because the inventory costs on the big ticket items is hard to justify if the margins are cut down by internet pricing. One advantage (only one for the consumer) of this move by Canon is that you might see more local retailers carrying high end gear.

Unfortunately for the B&M stores, there will still be an advantage to ordering online to avoid state sales tax (in most states).

For those crying supply/demand or free market this isn't any different than the government setting price floors on milk. The Government recognized that a free market would result in the obliteration of small farms in the US. Canon has realized (rightfully so) that internet sales were endangering every brick and mortar store sales.

For those who want to blame someone about this look away from Canon to the big box electronics stores. I suspect that it wasn't the small business mom and pop camera store that made this happen. It was most likely the larger retailers (best buy, wolf etc) that were putting the pressure on Canon to change the policies.

Right. This doesn't increase Canon's revenue directly. In fact, I think it only hurts in the long run. I suspect the Millennials don't buy as much stuff from B&M. They buy from the net. They read online reviews. BestBuy is bleeding, as reported in the news. Amazon, Adorama, etc. are probably grinning all the way to the bank... this makes them MORE powerful and better able to crush the B&M stores.

All things being equal, I'll STILL buy from the internet. The kid who knows NOTHING about cameras handing me a box is not worth the drive over there. I'll get it delivered for free and I won't have to see beautiful cameras with thumbprints on sensors because they can't keep the body caps on them and someone with no camera sense plays with them. NEVER buy a floor model from there... ;-)

This is standing in front of a train. Retailing can't go back to what it was. I bought a Sony NEX5N because I couldn't find a camera that offered that performance at the time for that price. But Sony's MAP doesn't seem to be helping them much. Look at their news.

It would be interesting to see a poll of CR readers for what percentage of their camera purchases are made at B&M. For me, it is 0% and I have owned 8 digital cameras since 2003. Maybe I am the exception.

How much of the MAP is the gameplaying that the retailers are forced to do for SONY and other products- ie, 'price is too low to advertise?' this is from Amazon's listing on the 5Dmk3:

Why Don't We Show the Price?Retailers like Amazon have the legal right to set their own prices independently, but some manufacturers place restrictions on how those prices may be communicated. Because our price on this item is lower than the manufacturer's "minimum advertised price," the manufacturer does not allow us to show you our price until you take further action, such as placing the item in your shopping cart, or in some cases, proceeding to the final checkout stage. The steps required depend on the details of the manufacturer's minimum advertised price policy. Taking these steps allows Amazon to show you our price consistent with our goal of always offering you the lowest possible prices on the widest selection of products.

This won't require you to purchase the product. You can easily remove it from your cart if you decide not to buy it.

We realize that this is an inconvenience and are regularly working to educate manufacturers on how their policies impact our customers. We welcome your comments and suggestions in our forum on this topic.

Canon needs to monitor these kind of activities. Otherwise, Canon will loose many more loyal customers.

As far as I see it Canon does everything and more to protect mid- to high-range investments like the 5d3, that's why they spec'ed the 6d as it is. If an investment is safe as far as electronics goes, it's with Canon ff and L.

That being said the 5d3 is a special case because most people though that $3500 was mildly to ridiculously overpriced given the competition and the improvements over the 5d2, and I'm sure the price will continue to drop until it's at least on d800 level.